Ann Coulter - Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism

CONTENTS

FOR MY FATHER, JOHN V. COULTER

THE NEW BLACKLIST: ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Deserving of the most hysterical liberal blacklisting for helping me with this book are: M. Stanton Evans, the worlds leading authority on Senator Joseph McCarthy, who gave megratisoriginal research for my brief version of a topic he will cover in meticulous detail in his forthcoming book; Allan H. Ryskind, who gave me an enormous amount of historical material for this and the next several books; Tom Winter and Human Events, for their decades of relentless truth-telling; and Jim Jerome for many things, including brilliant editorial assistance.

The next tier of blacklistees helped me with this book beyond the call of friendship, giving me invaluable jokes, historical facts, editorial advice, and arguments: Trish Baker, Robert Caplain, Andy Devlin, Jim Downey, Ted Forstmann, Melanie Graham, James Higgins, Merrill Kinstler, Jeremy Rabkin, Ned Rice, Jon Tukel, and Younis Zubchevich.

Also deserving of Senator Schumers crusading wrath for being thanked in my book are friends who have helped me in various ways, sometimes intentionally, including: Hans Bader, Jon Caldera, George Conway, the Danahers, Miguel Estrada, John Harrison, Mark and Kara Joseph, Mark Kielb, David Limbaugh, Jay Mann, Gene Meyer, Jim Moody, Mac Owens, and Dan Travers.

Finally, the most blameless and important group, worthy of at least a cocktail party snub, are the people who did a lot of work, but are stuck with me: my magnificent agent, Joni Evans; my truly amazing editor, Doug Pepper; my brave publisher, Steve Ross; and the long-suffering production editor, Camille Smith.

Also, long-overdue thanks to my superb editors at Universal Press Syndicate, Greg Melvin and Alan McDermott, who have edited my contemporaneous arguments about the war on terrorism in my columns since 9-11, some of which I have expanded in the terrorism chapters of this book.

And always, with special thanks to my familymy parents, John and Nell; my brothers, John and Jim; my sisters-in-law, Pam and Diane; and my precocious Republican nieces, Kimberly and Christina. Also God, but Hes already on the liberals blacklist.

TREASON

FIFTY YEARS OF
TREASON

Liberals have a preternatural gift for striking a position on the side of treason. You could be talking about Scrabble and they would instantly leap to the anti-American position. Everyone says liberals love America, too. No they dont. Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence. The lefts obsession with the crimes of the West and their Rousseauian respect for Third World savages all flow from this subversive goal. If anyone has the gaucherie to point out the lefts nearly unblemished record of rooting against America, liberals turn around and scream McCarthyism!

Liberals invented the myth of McCarthyism to delegitimize impertinent questions about their own patriotism. They boast (lyingly) about their superior stance on civil rights. But somehow their loyalty to the United States is off-limits as a subject of political debate. Why is the relative patriotism of the two parties the only issue that is out of bounds for discussion? Why cant we ask: Who is more patrioticDemocrats or Republicans? You could win that case in court.

Fifty years ago, Senator Joe McCarthy said, The loyal Democrats of this nation no longer have a Party.1 Since then, the evidence has continued to pour in. Liberals mock Americans who love their country, calling them cowboys, warmongers, religious zealots, and jingoists. By contrast, Americas enemies are called Uncle Joe, Fidel, agrarian reformers, and practitioners of a religion of peace. Indeed, Communists and terrorists alike are said to be advocates of peace.

Liberals demand that the nation treat enemies like friends and friends like enemies. We must lift sanctions, cancel embargoes, pull out our troops, reason with our adversaries, and absolutely never wage warunless the French say its okay. Any evidence that anyone seeks to harm America is stridently rejected as no evidence. Democratic senators, congressmen, and ex-presidents are always popping up in countries hostile to the United StatesCuba, Nicaragua, North Korea, Iraqhobnobbing with foreign despots who hate America. One year after Osama bin Laden staged a massive assault on America, a Democratic senator was praising bin Laden for his good work in building day care centers. At least we can be thankful that in the war on terrorism, we were spared the spectacle of liberals calling Osama bin Laden an agrarian reformer.

The ACLU responded to the 9-11 terrorist attack by threatening to sue schools that hung GOD BLESS AMERICA signs. Is the ACLU more or less patriotic than the Daughters of the American Revolution? Public schools across the nation prohibited the saying of the Pledge of Allegiance. Is it more patriotic or less patriotic to prevent schoolchildren from saying the Pledge of Allegiance? University professors called patriotic Americans naive and described patriotism as a benign umbrella for angry people.2 Is it more patriotic to love your country or to ridicule those who do as naive and angry? These are not questions impenetrable to human logic.

Liberals want to be able to attack America without anyone making an issue of it. Patriotism is vitally importantbut somehow impossible to measure. Liberals relentlessly oppose the military, the Pledge of Allegiance, the flag, and national defense. But if anyone calls them on it, they say hes a kook and a nut. Citing the unpatriotic positions of liberals constitutes McCarthyism.

In the 1988 presidential campaign, Vice President George Bush pointed out that his opponent Michael Dukakis had vetoed a bill requiring students to begin their day with the Pledge of Allegiance. Liberal heads spun with the dark reminders of the McCarthy era. Dukakis instantly compared Bushs dastardly trick of citing his record to Sen. Joseph McCarthys Red-baiting during the 1950s.3 Despite this slur against his patriotism, Dukakis said, The American people can smell the garbage.4 At least sophisticated Americans could smell the garbage. As one journalist said of Bushs unwarranted reference to Dukakiss record, it was intended to rile up ignoramuses in the American populace: the folks who dont know any better, whose inferior education or experience has not taught them that the right to speak out is the rudder of this great big boat we call America.5 The only people whose right to speak out is not part of this great big boat we call America are Republicans who dare to mention that a Democrat vetoed the Pledge of Allegiance. Free speech is a one-way ratchet for traitors. While journalists assailed Bush for creating an atmosphere of intolerance for those who object to patriotic oaths, they didnt mind creating an atmosphere of intolerance toward those who support patriotic oaths.6

Later, while campaigning at a naval base, Bush said of Dukakis, I wouldnt be surprised if he thinks a naval exercise is something you find in the Jane Fonda Workout Book.7 Again, there were wails of McCarthyism all around. Showing the lefts renowned ability to get a joke, one reporter earnestly demanded to know: Did Bush mean to imply that Dukakis is anti-military?8 Bush responded to the hysteria over his Jane Fonda joke, saying, Was that funny? Reasonably funny? A naval exerciseI thought that was pretty funny.9